Running - yes. It is VERY hard to find the chatter (I get all mine through his email newsletters). He is hurting for funds (as the party is in general) although he picked up some matching funds (peanuts compared to the other parties). He was buried by Big Media when he was on the Republican ticket (he did luck into getting invited to one debate) and I don't see that changing. He HAS been on Stewart and some late night talk shows though. All in all - "3rd party syndrome" - you are probably painfully aware of that based on your life experiences. What are your thoughts from your New Mexico days? (Glad you joined the conversation here)
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Libertarian Thread (Was: Gary Johnson Thread) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Maurile Tremblay
- Start date
NCCommish
Footballguy
I saw a report that said he only had 6k cash on hand and has only raised about 200k total. He is on all 50 ballots but with no real money there isn't much he can do except try to get on shows that will have him. None of the mainstream media seem interested in talking to him really and he won't be in the presidential debates.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
fine governor - really cut into the olskool patronage system at the Roundhouse - no mean feat. biggest flaw is that he gets fixated on an issue and becomes intractable to friend & foe and doesnt compromise once beyond that point. terrible campaigner - if Kerry went Libertarian, he'd be the fun one on the ticket. if i had any hope for America in the short term i wouldnt vote for him but, with my expectations lowered by recent events, i cant think of a better & more reasonable caretaker for the nation, the two biggies included.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
has a good personality, unless he fixates, but cant campaign worth suds. doesnt see the place for fuss & frummery in the process, so his cheerleading skills are non-existent. if America valued reasonable people in its important offices, we'd be Germany or summin.
Based off the younger demographic of the Ron Paul faction, I don't find this article (thought? editorial? anecdotal evidence?) to be overly shocking. I think kids (based on what I see from mine and his friends)are VERY independent thinkers nowadays (we were too, right?) and it would be nice if Johnson could make some of the in-roads that Paul has.
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-kids-are-all-libertarians?utm_source=vicetwitter
I’ve been talking with Danny and Matt quite a bit as of late. The topic of conversation has been politics. Danny and Matt are libertarians.
Most people, when they think of a libertarian, picture some kind of outsider, a weirdo – a lip-smacking Texas fireworks salesman in a ten-gallon hat, or someone like that sloshed constitutionalist whose DUI arrest video went viral last year. I’ve often heard liberals write libertarians off as “idiots.” But Danny and Matt are two of my best friends, and they aren’t idiots. They’re smart, thoughtful guys. I don’t exactly agree with their politics, but I understand where they’re coming from. Both voted for Obama in 2008. Now they can’t stand him. But they’re not so keen on Romney or the political right, either. Danny and Matt are fed up with everything, the whole political system.
“I see shenanigans,” Danny told me. “As an American, and even going back historically, being a Virginian – part of a legacy of people who stand up to power – I think the reality is that the government can’t solve our problems at this point.”
Matt, remarking on the federal government’s appetite for spending, said: “It’s like we have this plate full of food, and it’s just an enormous plate. It’s obscenely huge. We’re never going to finish it. But we just keep adding to it and piling on.”
While both of these complaints are standard republican talking points, Danny and Matt differ from the average GOP member in that neither is socially conservative.
“I think conservatives went to #### with Jerry Farewell and the Moral Majority,” says Matt.
And they aren’t into war.
“I went off the handle,” says Danny, “because I realised that we weren’t gonna’ pull out of Iraq, we weren’t gonna’ pull out of Afghanistan. I was so intrigued with Obama. I had champagne ready on election night. I thought America was back. But Obama, he didn't close Guantanamo Bay. He says we pulled out of Iraq but if you look into it you'll see we traded reserve soldiers for contractors. Guns for hire. And now they're ramping up rhetoric against Iran!”
Like it or not, more and more young Americans are thinking just like Danny and Matt. A recent Harvard Institute of Politics poll found that many young voters are embracing libertarian ideals, perhaps without even realising it.
Voters ranging in age from 18 to 29, the poll found, were neither here nor there on a traditional left/right political spectrum, and many displayed lukewarm feelings towards liberalism. Few, for instance, put faith in the government’s ability to stimulate the economy through spending (what’s known as Keynesian economics), less than half thought the government should provide free health care to those who can’t afford it and a remarkably small number – just 28 percent – thought the government should prioritise environmental concerns like global warming over economic concerns. At the same time, these voters backed away from social and neo-conservative ideals: they weren’t anti-gay, they didn’t like religion in their politics and they tended to pooh-pooh preemptive war.
What remained, political scientists and pollsters noted, looked an awful lot like the silhouette of libertarianism, a political philosophy that champions small government and tolerant social attitudes (think Soundgarden’s “My Wave”) and – that especially for youngsters – is fueled by a deep distrust of mainstream politics.
That distrust isn’t surprising, if you think about it. Over the past decade young Americans have been jerked around under the leadership of both political parties: They came of age in the aftermath of 9/11; watched the Enron and Catholic Church scandals unfold; saw two wars (one of which was premised upon a lie) roar into being and then drag on and on; witnessed the near-legalisation of torture; the jaw-dropping incompetence that was the federal response to Hurricane Katrina; the downgrading of our national debt, which continues to balloon; they struggled mightily, and continue to struggle, to get a start in life as a result of the depressed economy; they’ve seen culture wars rage; the middle class shrink; the death of Obama’s promise of hope; the government favour Wall Street over Main Street and the emergence of super corporations; they’ve even seen the Cheshire grin of Herman Cain. But will their angst and anger end up meaning anything? I posed the question to John Zogby, a veteran political pollster.
“It could spell trouble for Obama,” Zogby said. “Over the years, young voters haven’t been critical to national elections. But they’ve been critical as of late, certainly to Obama. They were essential in 2008 because their turnout increased dramatically, and he got their support by a factor of two to one. So it was a bigger pie in general, and Obama got a bigger piece of it.”
“But flip over to 2012,” he said, “and what you see is a lack of enthusiasm and a lack of confidence, not only in Obama, but in everybody, in everything. And so instead of Obama getting 66 percent of the young vote, the poll I did in May had him at 46 percent, and if that keeps up it could be disastrous.” Young voters won’t go for Romney, Zogby said. But it is possible that some could be siphoned off by Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party presidential candidate.
“The battle over the young vote is going to take place on college campuses, and isn’t going to be Obama vs. Romney,” Zogby said, “It’s going to be Obama vs. Johnson.” That’s the short-term. In the long run things are a bit foggier.
Emily Ekins, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, and the director of polling at the Reason Foundation, has been studying the voting habits of young voters. "The old way of viewing the world as just being left and right,” she said, “with young people, it’s likely not going to continue being reality."
And where political reality could break down, she says, is over social issues. Ekins tracked self-identified conservatives under the age of 35 on social, fiscal and foreign policy issues using data dating back to 2004. Over time, they remained fiscally conservative, but grew more and more socially liberal – a classic libertarian mix. And if the precepts of political science have anything to say about it, she says, it looks as though they’ll stay that way.
“If people do change over time,” Ekins explained, “they tend to become more economically conservative. But that’s typically not the case with social issues. So what we've seen is something like a permanent shift, starting now, over social issues.” If Republicans want to get those votes, she said, they’ll need to soften their stance on social conservatism. If Democrats want them, conversely, “they’ll have to clamp down on being so economically liberal."
Bottom line, one party or the other will need to change the way it does business.
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-kids-are-all-libertarians?utm_source=vicetwitter
I’ve been talking with Danny and Matt quite a bit as of late. The topic of conversation has been politics. Danny and Matt are libertarians.
Most people, when they think of a libertarian, picture some kind of outsider, a weirdo – a lip-smacking Texas fireworks salesman in a ten-gallon hat, or someone like that sloshed constitutionalist whose DUI arrest video went viral last year. I’ve often heard liberals write libertarians off as “idiots.” But Danny and Matt are two of my best friends, and they aren’t idiots. They’re smart, thoughtful guys. I don’t exactly agree with their politics, but I understand where they’re coming from. Both voted for Obama in 2008. Now they can’t stand him. But they’re not so keen on Romney or the political right, either. Danny and Matt are fed up with everything, the whole political system.
“I see shenanigans,” Danny told me. “As an American, and even going back historically, being a Virginian – part of a legacy of people who stand up to power – I think the reality is that the government can’t solve our problems at this point.”
Matt, remarking on the federal government’s appetite for spending, said: “It’s like we have this plate full of food, and it’s just an enormous plate. It’s obscenely huge. We’re never going to finish it. But we just keep adding to it and piling on.”
While both of these complaints are standard republican talking points, Danny and Matt differ from the average GOP member in that neither is socially conservative.
“I think conservatives went to #### with Jerry Farewell and the Moral Majority,” says Matt.
And they aren’t into war.
“I went off the handle,” says Danny, “because I realised that we weren’t gonna’ pull out of Iraq, we weren’t gonna’ pull out of Afghanistan. I was so intrigued with Obama. I had champagne ready on election night. I thought America was back. But Obama, he didn't close Guantanamo Bay. He says we pulled out of Iraq but if you look into it you'll see we traded reserve soldiers for contractors. Guns for hire. And now they're ramping up rhetoric against Iran!”
Like it or not, more and more young Americans are thinking just like Danny and Matt. A recent Harvard Institute of Politics poll found that many young voters are embracing libertarian ideals, perhaps without even realising it.
Voters ranging in age from 18 to 29, the poll found, were neither here nor there on a traditional left/right political spectrum, and many displayed lukewarm feelings towards liberalism. Few, for instance, put faith in the government’s ability to stimulate the economy through spending (what’s known as Keynesian economics), less than half thought the government should provide free health care to those who can’t afford it and a remarkably small number – just 28 percent – thought the government should prioritise environmental concerns like global warming over economic concerns. At the same time, these voters backed away from social and neo-conservative ideals: they weren’t anti-gay, they didn’t like religion in their politics and they tended to pooh-pooh preemptive war.
What remained, political scientists and pollsters noted, looked an awful lot like the silhouette of libertarianism, a political philosophy that champions small government and tolerant social attitudes (think Soundgarden’s “My Wave”) and – that especially for youngsters – is fueled by a deep distrust of mainstream politics.
That distrust isn’t surprising, if you think about it. Over the past decade young Americans have been jerked around under the leadership of both political parties: They came of age in the aftermath of 9/11; watched the Enron and Catholic Church scandals unfold; saw two wars (one of which was premised upon a lie) roar into being and then drag on and on; witnessed the near-legalisation of torture; the jaw-dropping incompetence that was the federal response to Hurricane Katrina; the downgrading of our national debt, which continues to balloon; they struggled mightily, and continue to struggle, to get a start in life as a result of the depressed economy; they’ve seen culture wars rage; the middle class shrink; the death of Obama’s promise of hope; the government favour Wall Street over Main Street and the emergence of super corporations; they’ve even seen the Cheshire grin of Herman Cain. But will their angst and anger end up meaning anything? I posed the question to John Zogby, a veteran political pollster.
“It could spell trouble for Obama,” Zogby said. “Over the years, young voters haven’t been critical to national elections. But they’ve been critical as of late, certainly to Obama. They were essential in 2008 because their turnout increased dramatically, and he got their support by a factor of two to one. So it was a bigger pie in general, and Obama got a bigger piece of it.”
“But flip over to 2012,” he said, “and what you see is a lack of enthusiasm and a lack of confidence, not only in Obama, but in everybody, in everything. And so instead of Obama getting 66 percent of the young vote, the poll I did in May had him at 46 percent, and if that keeps up it could be disastrous.” Young voters won’t go for Romney, Zogby said. But it is possible that some could be siphoned off by Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party presidential candidate.
“The battle over the young vote is going to take place on college campuses, and isn’t going to be Obama vs. Romney,” Zogby said, “It’s going to be Obama vs. Johnson.” That’s the short-term. In the long run things are a bit foggier.
Emily Ekins, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, and the director of polling at the Reason Foundation, has been studying the voting habits of young voters. "The old way of viewing the world as just being left and right,” she said, “with young people, it’s likely not going to continue being reality."
And where political reality could break down, she says, is over social issues. Ekins tracked self-identified conservatives under the age of 35 on social, fiscal and foreign policy issues using data dating back to 2004. Over time, they remained fiscally conservative, but grew more and more socially liberal – a classic libertarian mix. And if the precepts of political science have anything to say about it, she says, it looks as though they’ll stay that way.
“If people do change over time,” Ekins explained, “they tend to become more economically conservative. But that’s typically not the case with social issues. So what we've seen is something like a permanent shift, starting now, over social issues.” If Republicans want to get those votes, she said, they’ll need to soften their stance on social conservatism. If Democrats want them, conversely, “they’ll have to clamp down on being so economically liberal."
Bottom line, one party or the other will need to change the way it does business.
Fennis
Footballguy
CNN still shows Johnson out of the presidential race. A mistake they refuse to correct.
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/candidates.html
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/candidates.html
I wish I could say I am shocked, but no surprise at all. Can Johnson get some money from the Perot Trust? Maybe if he promises to tax the heck out of the rich, Buffett would through a couple billions his way?
NCCommish
Footballguy
He really needs someone to come through with a lot of cash, quick. Aren't there any rich libertarians?
Last edited by a moderator:
I was going to send him my last $20 but the wife got mad :(
Johnson has spent a good amount of time in Florida. Article from the Miami Herald - http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/16/2898206/gary-johnson-its-not-just-a-two.html
IN MY OPINION
Gary Johnson: It’s not just a two-man race
BY GLENN GARVIN
GGARVIN@MIAMIHERALD.COM
You probably don’t give a great deal of thought to Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party presidential candidate. Maybe you should. Mitt Romney certainly is.
Romney’s political cronies in Michigan have gotten Johnson kicked off the November ballot there because he was three minutes late in filing some paperwork. With polls indicating the race for Michigan’s 16 votes is a dead heat, Romney’s camp doesn’t want to take any chances that Johnson, a former Republican who served two terms as governor of New Mexico, will siphon off any of his votes.
Romney, however, might not want to start counting his new Libertarian votes yet. Johnson’s lawyers, arguing that one absurd technicality deserves another, say they’ve found a loophole in Michigan law that will keep the Libertarian Party on the ballot if they can just find some other guy named Gary Johnson to take his place.
“And fortunately, I’ve got a pretty common name,” laughs Johnson.
There are other good reasons you might want to be giving Johnson some thought.
• He’s the only candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states and Washington D.C. who shows no interest in bombing Iran.
• He’s the only candidate willing to violate the politicians’ version of don’t-ask-don’t-tell and say out loud what they all know, that the war on drugs is a useless waste of money.
• And he’s the only candidate promising to cut the federal budget — actually cut it, not just slow its growth — in his first year in office.
Not symbolically, either. He plans to cut $1.4 trillion in government spending. And it won’t be as hard as you think. Start with the Pentagon, where Johnson has already made a list of cuts that amount to 43 percent of the budget.
“You know how many years that rolls back our defense spending?” Johnson asks. “All the way to 2003. That’s not the end of the world. I think we can live safely within the military security we had in 2003.”
Johnson confounds political reporters because his mix of positions doesn’t correspond to their bipolar worldview, where everybody is either a free-spending, pro-civil-liberties, dovish liberal Democrat or a skinflint, lock-‘em-up, hawkish conservative Republican.
(Actually, the real world of politics doesn’t correspond to that view, either — Obama killed more people with drone attacks in his first year in office than George W. Bush did during his entire two terms. And federal spending jumped 83 percent during Bush’s presidency. But let’s put that aside for another day.)
So political reporters label Johnson an unelectable crank from the fringes and ignore him. Did you know he ran for the Republican presidential nomination earlier this year? Probably not. In the early going, he was actually ahead of Rick Santorum and tied with Herman Cain in some polls. But then CNN and other news organizations excluded him from their candidate debates, locked him out of their polls, and generally reduced him to the status of an unperson. Eventually he bolted the GOP for the Libertarians.
But Johnson is actually much closer to the mainstream of American voters than he is to the fringes. Poll after poll show growing numbers of Americans are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. “I don’t think either major party embraces those values,” says Johnson. “I’m running in the same political category as most people in this country.”
They figured that out in New Mexico, where Johnson was governor from 1995 to 2003. Though the state is overwhelmingly Democratic, Johnson won a solid victory with his platform of cutting taxes and reining in spending. And in spite of facing a legislature that was two-thirds Democratic, he delivered, vetoing 750 bills and thousands of line-item expenditures. He easily won reelection, and when he left office the state had a $1 billion budget surplus.
Jobs in New Mexico grew at a faster clip under Johnson than under any other former governor who ran for president this year — five times faster than they did in Massachusetts when Romney was governor. But Johnson quickly corrects any suggestion that he “created” jobs.
“I didn’t create a single job,” he says. “The private sector did that. But I did create an environment where the private sector could flourish. And that’s what I’ll do as president.’’
He might, however, create one job. If you live in Michigan and your name is Gary Johnson, send in a résumé, quick.
IN MY OPINION
Gary Johnson: It’s not just a two-man race
BY GLENN GARVIN
GGARVIN@MIAMIHERALD.COM
You probably don’t give a great deal of thought to Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party presidential candidate. Maybe you should. Mitt Romney certainly is.
Romney’s political cronies in Michigan have gotten Johnson kicked off the November ballot there because he was three minutes late in filing some paperwork. With polls indicating the race for Michigan’s 16 votes is a dead heat, Romney’s camp doesn’t want to take any chances that Johnson, a former Republican who served two terms as governor of New Mexico, will siphon off any of his votes.
Romney, however, might not want to start counting his new Libertarian votes yet. Johnson’s lawyers, arguing that one absurd technicality deserves another, say they’ve found a loophole in Michigan law that will keep the Libertarian Party on the ballot if they can just find some other guy named Gary Johnson to take his place.
“And fortunately, I’ve got a pretty common name,” laughs Johnson.
There are other good reasons you might want to be giving Johnson some thought.
• He’s the only candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states and Washington D.C. who shows no interest in bombing Iran.
• He’s the only candidate willing to violate the politicians’ version of don’t-ask-don’t-tell and say out loud what they all know, that the war on drugs is a useless waste of money.
• And he’s the only candidate promising to cut the federal budget — actually cut it, not just slow its growth — in his first year in office.
Not symbolically, either. He plans to cut $1.4 trillion in government spending. And it won’t be as hard as you think. Start with the Pentagon, where Johnson has already made a list of cuts that amount to 43 percent of the budget.
“You know how many years that rolls back our defense spending?” Johnson asks. “All the way to 2003. That’s not the end of the world. I think we can live safely within the military security we had in 2003.”
Johnson confounds political reporters because his mix of positions doesn’t correspond to their bipolar worldview, where everybody is either a free-spending, pro-civil-liberties, dovish liberal Democrat or a skinflint, lock-‘em-up, hawkish conservative Republican.
(Actually, the real world of politics doesn’t correspond to that view, either — Obama killed more people with drone attacks in his first year in office than George W. Bush did during his entire two terms. And federal spending jumped 83 percent during Bush’s presidency. But let’s put that aside for another day.)
So political reporters label Johnson an unelectable crank from the fringes and ignore him. Did you know he ran for the Republican presidential nomination earlier this year? Probably not. In the early going, he was actually ahead of Rick Santorum and tied with Herman Cain in some polls. But then CNN and other news organizations excluded him from their candidate debates, locked him out of their polls, and generally reduced him to the status of an unperson. Eventually he bolted the GOP for the Libertarians.
But Johnson is actually much closer to the mainstream of American voters than he is to the fringes. Poll after poll show growing numbers of Americans are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. “I don’t think either major party embraces those values,” says Johnson. “I’m running in the same political category as most people in this country.”
They figured that out in New Mexico, where Johnson was governor from 1995 to 2003. Though the state is overwhelmingly Democratic, Johnson won a solid victory with his platform of cutting taxes and reining in spending. And in spite of facing a legislature that was two-thirds Democratic, he delivered, vetoing 750 bills and thousands of line-item expenditures. He easily won reelection, and when he left office the state had a $1 billion budget surplus.
Jobs in New Mexico grew at a faster clip under Johnson than under any other former governor who ran for president this year — five times faster than they did in Massachusetts when Romney was governor. But Johnson quickly corrects any suggestion that he “created” jobs.
“I didn’t create a single job,” he says. “The private sector did that. But I did create an environment where the private sector could flourish. And that’s what I’ll do as president.’’
He might, however, create one job. If you live in Michigan and your name is Gary Johnson, send in a résumé, quick.
NCCommish
Footballguy
I hope they find someone. He should be on the ballot and he should be in the debates. It's infuriating that someone on all 50 state ballots is completely overlooked and excluded. He probably won't get my vote anyway but he deserves the chance to convince me.
Yeah, I missed the
mark on that. Wasn't meant to discuss the merits of our tax system; just wishing he could find some campaign money.I read through his website and all of the position statements tonight. I'd say I agree with probably 75-80% of what he stands for. His take on abortion/women's right to choose, legalizing marijuana (I'm not a smot poker, but I agree that alcohol in particular is probably WAY more damaging to people's health and to our society...and if we can tax the heck out of that, why not pot too?), not using the military to nation-build, and a consumption-based tax vs. an income tax is about spot-on with me. But he seems a little "too" State's Rights for my tastes...and all the talk of abolishing the IRS, the Dept. of Education, etc. makes me awfully nervous. i.e. what if he wanted to leave Civil Rights to the States? That's an extreme example, of course...but you see where I'm going related to people who are hard-core States rights.
I'd certainly welcome the opportunity to hear him debate Romney and Obama! I'd give him a snowball's chance in Miami of even cracking double-digits nationally. But even if he can be "used" to steer the conversation and influence action/policy for the Obama or Romney Administration (I shudder at the thought of even typing "Romney Administration"
), that'd help us be better off than we are today.
I'd certainly welcome the opportunity to hear him debate Romney and Obama! I'd give him a snowball's chance in Miami of even cracking double-digits nationally. But even if he can be "used" to steer the conversation and influence action/policy for the Obama or Romney Administration (I shudder at the thought of even typing "Romney Administration"
), that'd help us be better off than we are today.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Fennis
Footballguy
http://www.aclulibertywatch.org/ALWCandidateReportCard.pdfACLU score card on civil liberties.RACIAL PROFILING = Four Torches Believes TSA should identify high-risk individuals for invasive pat-downs and full-body scans versus using racial profiling of the general population. Opposes Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, S.B. 1070, saying, “it’s going to lead to racial profiling. I don’t how you determine one individual from another—is it color of skin?—as to whether one is an American citizen or the other is an illegal immigrant.”I read through his website and all of the position statements tonight. I'd say I agree with probably 75-80% of what he stands for. His take on abortion/women's right to choose, legalizing marijuana (I'm not a smot poker, but I agree that alcohol in particular is probably WAY more damaging to people's health and to our society...and if we can tax the heck out of that, why not pot too?), not using the military to nation-build, and a consumption-based tax vs. an income tax is about spot-on with me. But he seems a little "too" State's Rights for my tastes...and all the talk of abolishing the IRS, the Dept. of Education, etc. makes me awfully nervous. i.e. what if he wanted to leave Civil Rights to the States? That's an extreme example, of course...but you see where I'm going related to people who are hard-core States rights.I'd certainly welcome the opportunity to hear him debate Romney and Obama! I'd give him a snowball's chance in Miami of even cracking double-digits nationally. But even if he can be "used" to steer the conversation and influence action/policy for the Obama or Romney Administration (I shudder at the thought of even typing "Romney Administration"
Last edited by a moderator:
NCCommish
Footballguy
As I have said many times if Libertarians would put in the work and clean up their platform to be more realistic I'd be much more interested and likely to give them my vote.'Ren Ho3k said:Thought you were one of the good ones NCC.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I have some of the same concerns as you mentioned. However right now the priority needs to be on getting the budget in order. I am willing to give Gary Johnson a shot to try to do that. I have no illusions of that even possibly, maybe happening with the parties we currently have in charge.As I have said many times if Libertarians would put in the work and clean up their platform to be more realistic I'd be much more interested and likely to give them my vote.'Ren Ho3k said:
NCCommish
Footballguy
Well this is the one thing I am sure I agree with Johnson supporters on. He is on every ballot. He should have a place in the debates.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
It seems that the 2 main parties have been getting a lot of cooperation from the networks ever since Ross Perot threw a monkey wrench in their typical pandering nonsensical promises.
Campaign finance reform is a distant memory now and citizens united made what was bad even worse. We need some outsiders steering the conversation.
At least a third of us are sick and tired of the 2 parties and I think that is being pretty generous to them. Gary Johnson can win this thing if we all grow a conscience and vote for the best guy.
Campaign finance reform is a distant memory now and citizens united made what was bad even worse. We need some outsiders steering the conversation.
At least a third of us are sick and tired of the 2 parties and I think that is being pretty generous to them. Gary Johnson can win this thing if we all grow a conscience and vote for the best guy.
- don't think he can win but I tell everyone who will listen that if EVERYONE forgot that "vote for a winner", "he doesn't have a chance", "you are wasting your vote" crap that he would likely end up closer than many realize.Couple of new stories. Continuing to hammer the drug war - http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/gary-johnson-tries-to-inject-pot-legalization-into-the-presidential-race/260162/
Earlier this month, anonymous associates of President Obama whispered to Marc Ambinder that "if the president wins a second term, he plans to tackle another American war that has so far been successful only in perpetuating more misery: the four decades of The Drug War." The news was greeted with skepticism due to the fact that Obama broke prior promises about federal targeting of medical marijuana facilities and has zealously prosecuted current drug policy.
In a country where 50 percent of the population now favors legalizing marijuana, the Republican Party's candidate, Mitt Romney, is even less likely to take that course. Here he is angrily dismissing its importance.
That's the context for Gary Johnson's new advertisement, above. He isn't the first Libertarian Party nominee to favor legalizing marijuana. But he is the first to do so in a country where more people agree with his position on the subject than the positions of the Republican or Democratic candidate. He attacks the positions of both Romney and Obama, pointing out that the latter cracked down on marijuana despite the fact that he "famously smoked it." Had Obama been arrested and jailed after doing so he almost certainly wouldn't be president today.
Johnson isn't remotely competitive with his opponents in opinion polls. He suffers from poor name recognition and a dearth of funds. But he is a credible advocate for a position that many Americans hold and neither major party is addressing. Whether the national media will permit him to challenge his opponents in any form other than paid advertisements remains to be seen.
Polling at 5% nationally (up from 2%) - doing well out West. I can't find the Nevada number now but there was an article about him taking votes mainly from Romney out here (Ron Paul had a decent contingent in 2008 as well) - http://www.examiner.com/article/johnson-polls-5-nationally-higher-out-west
July 18, 2012. Charlotte, NC. Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Gary Johnson is cautiously optimistic, as they say in politics. His campaign released a statement announcing their candidate had just polled 5.3 percent nationally. In one state, he’s registering as high as 12 percent. Considering independent and opposition party candidates never seem to crack 1 percent of the vote, Johnson looks like he’s bound for the history books.
According to Johnson’s campaign, ‘A national Zogby poll released Friday shows Governor Johnson at 5% when included along with President Obama and Mitt Romney.’ Four years ago, independent Presidential candidate Ralph Nader only received 0.56 percent of the general election vote. That should give readers some sense of just how successful Gary Johnson’s campaign has been thus far.
After being unjustly excluded from the polls and debates surrounding the GOP Presidential primary this year, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson walked away from the Republican Party in December and subsequently accepted the Libertarian Party’s nomination for President. Showing just how much trouble the Republican Party is in this election cycle, Johnson isn’t even the only big-name Republican to quit the GOP and run against them. Former Congressman Virgil Goode also quit the Republican Party this year and is running for President on the Constitution Party ticket.
Read the article ‘Obama Gift – 4 GOP General Election Opponents’ for more information.
Romney in trouble
Running against 2 former Republicans in November who only receive half of one percent isn’t as damaging to Mitt Romney as running against Gary Johnson, who’s already polling over 5 percent, higher in states surrounding his home state of New Mexico. And Johnson only looks to go higher from here.
According to a report from NewsMax.com, the Zogby poll mentioned above shows, “Libertarian Johnson hurting Romney’s chances.” The review goes on to say, “Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson is standing in the way of Republican Mitt Romney’s ability to pull ahead of President Barack Obama.” The numbers show that when Gary Johnson is not included in an Obama vs. Romney poll, Obama is ahead by 3 points. But when Johnson’s name is also present, the former New Mexico Governor captures 5 percent, while Obama’s lead over Romney grows to 6 points.
15% and a podium at the debates
Admittedly, the immediate goal of the Johnson campaign is to reach 15% in national polls. That would automatically trigger Gary Johnson’s inclusion in the all-important nationally televised Presidential debates. That in itself would turn the race upside down and cast the contest between two seemingly unpopular politicians in a whole new light, something many voters have expressed a desire for. Many polls show as many as half of the country’s electorate unhappy with their two main choices.
That widespread sentiment is apparently showing up in the polls. As Ron Nielson, senior advisor to Gary Johnson, puts it, “5% without ANY radio or TV advertising! Who can doubt that we can get to 15% with just a fraction of the advertising budget Obama and Romney are spending?” Even an independent observer like this author can attest that going from 0 to 5 percent nationally, without spending one cent on advertising, is incredibly impressive.
Higher in other states
Gary Johnson may be polling 5% nationally, but he’s polling even higher in some western states surrounding his home of New Mexico. According to New Mexico Watchdog, Johnson has registered on various polls in New Mexico at 7% on up to 12 percent. They also show Johnson polling 9% in Arizona, 8 percent in Montana, 7% in Colorado and 7% as far away as New Hampshire. The report also points out that as recently as May, Johnson was only polling 2% nationally.
Obama and Romney hurting themselves
Gary Johnson’s rapidly rising poll numbers can’t be attributed to the candidate and his heartfelt campaign alone. His November opponents, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, have been doing serious damage to each other’s credibility and reputation lately. As mentioned in yesterday’s Whiteout Press article, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer termed it, “All-out political warfare”, speaking of the Obama and Romney campaigns trading accusations of “crime” and “felony”.
Read ‘Obama and Romney doing Johnson’s work for him’ for further details surrounding the scandals plaguing Mitt Romney and Barack Obama right now.
Gov. Gary Johnson isn’t taking anything for granted, even with the encouraging poll numbers. This weekend, the Libertarian Presidential candidate will be participating in the Liberty 5k Fun Run in Charlotte, North Carolina. There, he will join Libertarian Party Gubernatorial candidate Barbara Howe. The Liberty Fun Run will be taking place July 21, 2012 at 9:00am EDT in Charlotte, NC. A $25 donation is requested. For more information, visit the event’s Facebook page.
Earlier this month, anonymous associates of President Obama whispered to Marc Ambinder that "if the president wins a second term, he plans to tackle another American war that has so far been successful only in perpetuating more misery: the four decades of The Drug War." The news was greeted with skepticism due to the fact that Obama broke prior promises about federal targeting of medical marijuana facilities and has zealously prosecuted current drug policy.
In a country where 50 percent of the population now favors legalizing marijuana, the Republican Party's candidate, Mitt Romney, is even less likely to take that course. Here he is angrily dismissing its importance.
That's the context for Gary Johnson's new advertisement, above. He isn't the first Libertarian Party nominee to favor legalizing marijuana. But he is the first to do so in a country where more people agree with his position on the subject than the positions of the Republican or Democratic candidate. He attacks the positions of both Romney and Obama, pointing out that the latter cracked down on marijuana despite the fact that he "famously smoked it." Had Obama been arrested and jailed after doing so he almost certainly wouldn't be president today.
Johnson isn't remotely competitive with his opponents in opinion polls. He suffers from poor name recognition and a dearth of funds. But he is a credible advocate for a position that many Americans hold and neither major party is addressing. Whether the national media will permit him to challenge his opponents in any form other than paid advertisements remains to be seen.
Polling at 5% nationally (up from 2%) - doing well out West. I can't find the Nevada number now but there was an article about him taking votes mainly from Romney out here (Ron Paul had a decent contingent in 2008 as well) - http://www.examiner.com/article/johnson-polls-5-nationally-higher-out-west
July 18, 2012. Charlotte, NC. Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Gary Johnson is cautiously optimistic, as they say in politics. His campaign released a statement announcing their candidate had just polled 5.3 percent nationally. In one state, he’s registering as high as 12 percent. Considering independent and opposition party candidates never seem to crack 1 percent of the vote, Johnson looks like he’s bound for the history books.
According to Johnson’s campaign, ‘A national Zogby poll released Friday shows Governor Johnson at 5% when included along with President Obama and Mitt Romney.’ Four years ago, independent Presidential candidate Ralph Nader only received 0.56 percent of the general election vote. That should give readers some sense of just how successful Gary Johnson’s campaign has been thus far.
After being unjustly excluded from the polls and debates surrounding the GOP Presidential primary this year, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson walked away from the Republican Party in December and subsequently accepted the Libertarian Party’s nomination for President. Showing just how much trouble the Republican Party is in this election cycle, Johnson isn’t even the only big-name Republican to quit the GOP and run against them. Former Congressman Virgil Goode also quit the Republican Party this year and is running for President on the Constitution Party ticket.
Read the article ‘Obama Gift – 4 GOP General Election Opponents’ for more information.
Romney in trouble
Running against 2 former Republicans in November who only receive half of one percent isn’t as damaging to Mitt Romney as running against Gary Johnson, who’s already polling over 5 percent, higher in states surrounding his home state of New Mexico. And Johnson only looks to go higher from here.
According to a report from NewsMax.com, the Zogby poll mentioned above shows, “Libertarian Johnson hurting Romney’s chances.” The review goes on to say, “Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson is standing in the way of Republican Mitt Romney’s ability to pull ahead of President Barack Obama.” The numbers show that when Gary Johnson is not included in an Obama vs. Romney poll, Obama is ahead by 3 points. But when Johnson’s name is also present, the former New Mexico Governor captures 5 percent, while Obama’s lead over Romney grows to 6 points.
15% and a podium at the debates
Admittedly, the immediate goal of the Johnson campaign is to reach 15% in national polls. That would automatically trigger Gary Johnson’s inclusion in the all-important nationally televised Presidential debates. That in itself would turn the race upside down and cast the contest between two seemingly unpopular politicians in a whole new light, something many voters have expressed a desire for. Many polls show as many as half of the country’s electorate unhappy with their two main choices.
That widespread sentiment is apparently showing up in the polls. As Ron Nielson, senior advisor to Gary Johnson, puts it, “5% without ANY radio or TV advertising! Who can doubt that we can get to 15% with just a fraction of the advertising budget Obama and Romney are spending?” Even an independent observer like this author can attest that going from 0 to 5 percent nationally, without spending one cent on advertising, is incredibly impressive.
Higher in other states
Gary Johnson may be polling 5% nationally, but he’s polling even higher in some western states surrounding his home of New Mexico. According to New Mexico Watchdog, Johnson has registered on various polls in New Mexico at 7% on up to 12 percent. They also show Johnson polling 9% in Arizona, 8 percent in Montana, 7% in Colorado and 7% as far away as New Hampshire. The report also points out that as recently as May, Johnson was only polling 2% nationally.
Obama and Romney hurting themselves
Gary Johnson’s rapidly rising poll numbers can’t be attributed to the candidate and his heartfelt campaign alone. His November opponents, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, have been doing serious damage to each other’s credibility and reputation lately. As mentioned in yesterday’s Whiteout Press article, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer termed it, “All-out political warfare”, speaking of the Obama and Romney campaigns trading accusations of “crime” and “felony”.
Read ‘Obama and Romney doing Johnson’s work for him’ for further details surrounding the scandals plaguing Mitt Romney and Barack Obama right now.
Gov. Gary Johnson isn’t taking anything for granted, even with the encouraging poll numbers. This weekend, the Libertarian Presidential candidate will be participating in the Liberty 5k Fun Run in Charlotte, North Carolina. There, he will join Libertarian Party Gubernatorial candidate Barbara Howe. The Liberty Fun Run will be taking place July 21, 2012 at 9:00am EDT in Charlotte, NC. A $25 donation is requested. For more information, visit the event’s Facebook page.
More realistic about the likely consequences of their preferred policies, or more realistic about what they'd be able to accomplish if they got into office?I don't see why the second type of realisticness should affect your vote.Let's say that Gary Johnson promises to repeal the War on Drugs, even though, realistically, he won't be able to literally repeal all the federal and state anti-drug laws currently on the books. So what? (A) He'd probably do more in that regard, if he actually got elected, than Romney or Obama (by, say, prioritizing federal enforcement differently), and (B) In the more likely scenario that he doesn't actually get elected, more votes for Johnson would still signal to the two major parties that repealing the War on Drugs is a position worth taking seriously.The first type of realisticness should affect your vote, but not as much as if Libertarian candidates had a realistic chance of winning. I think it's okay to spend protest votes on candidates who are right on certain important issues, even if they are kind of kooky on various other issues, as long as the candidates' right-on views are more likely to be taken seriously in the overall national dialogue than their kookier views. Applying that to the current campaigns, I think Gary Johnson's views on marriage equality, the war on drugs, and non-interventionist foreign policy will be taken more seriously than his desire to abolish the IRS or the Department of Education; and I think that protest votes for Johnson will therefore register more as support for the former ideas than for the latter.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is too optimistic. The 15% figure is not set in stone. It is merely the current policy of the Commission on Presidential Debates. If Johnson actually reached 15% in the requisite number of polls, either some of those polls would be excluded, or the bar would be raised to 20%.
Last edited by a moderator:
NCCommish
Footballguy
Well here's the thing I don't want the platform to be wink, wink "We can't win so we'll leave in the ridiculous". I can't vote for someone running on those things. This goes back to my larger problem with the Libertarians. Do the things to become what you want to become or don't bother. Stop with every 4 years we'll put someone up to run but really do nothing the rest of the time. Maybe if they had done some fundraising they'd be able to promote their candidate for example. But they act like you can wait until it's too late to do much every year and then blame people for voting for "winners" instead of your candidate for your inevitable defeat. Time for them to grow up or pick a new hobby.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
So as the grown up here you are 100% on board with what Obama has done these past 4 years?
NCCommish
Footballguy
First I referring to the party but feel free to take it personally.To answer your question absolutely not. I hate his continued expansion of the imperial presidency. I hate the idea of murdering US citizens abroad on his say so. And those are just two things off the top of my head. But at least the party doesn't go under ground between presidential cycles. At least their platform changes with pressure from the electorate. And it isn't full of stupid 19th century policy for 21st century issues.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I wasn't the person who called MT childish. Yeah that offended me.I hear what you are saying as far as getting going on the campaign earlier, but he was trying to win as a R 1st and only switching to L after that didn't work. I wish he would have run as a L from the get go as well, I would trust him more then. But it is what it is.
BTW - that Jefferson quote you're wearing sounds like you appreciate out of date wisdom yourself. And that is a libertarian principle.
http://www.bartleby.com/66/29/30729.htmlThat is the real quote. Yours is an embellished version.
Last edited by a moderator:
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Hope and Change = the language of grown ups not fairy tales.
Libertarian platform, based on the constitution, uncompromised and consistent = not serious enough for prime time.
Libertarian platform, based on the constitution, uncompromised and consistent = not serious enough for prime time.
Bonzai
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
As opposed to what? The platform of war, debt and slavery? Good luck with that.As I have said many times if Libertarians would put in the work and clean up their platform to be more realistic I'd be much more interested and likely to give them my vote.
Wrighteous Ray
Footballguy
Those sorts of websites usually suck but I thought that one was pretty good. My top two were Obama (89%) and Jill Stein - Green Party (84%). I only agree with Romney 5% of the time.
Bonzai
Footballguy
I got Jill Stein (93%). Never heard of her.
Fennis
Footballguy
83% Barack Obama
on economic, science, social, immigration, foreign policy, and environmental issues.
77% Gary Johnson
on healthcare, social, immigration, and domestic policy issues.
74% Jill Stein
on science, foreign policy, immigration, and environmental issues.
63% Ron Paul
on healthcare, domestic policy, and environmental issues.
51% Mitt Romney
on healthcare and environmental issues.
85% Washington Voters
on social, science, foreign policy, healthcare, domestic policy, environmental, and immigration issues.
on economic, science, social, immigration, foreign policy, and environmental issues.
77% Gary Johnson
on healthcare, social, immigration, and domestic policy issues.
74% Jill Stein
on science, foreign policy, immigration, and environmental issues.
63% Ron Paul
on healthcare, domestic policy, and environmental issues.
51% Mitt Romney
on healthcare and environmental issues.
85% Washington Voters
on social, science, foreign policy, healthcare, domestic policy, environmental, and immigration issues.
Sarnoff
Footballguy
Gary Johnson. 95%. A bunch of those were issues where I have no idea what his stance is, if it's known.
Brady Marino
Footballguy
96% Gary Johnson, 71% Ron Paul, everyone else well behind (Romney ahead of Obama for you lemmings who only care about those two).
Maelstrom
Footballguy
Same site told me I matched in the 80s% with Gary, and I know very little about him. I was surprised how accurate I felt that site was, btw.So here's my question for the Gary Johnson campaign folks:
Any chance he could win the election as a Lib?
If no (expected answer), why should I vote for him instead of the one of the major 2 parties that is the next closest match (in this case and if it matters, Obama by a landslide, almost double Romney, in that quiz.)
I really, really wish we had a viable multi-party system. I think that is one of the things that could seriously help the political debate in our country. But the 2 party system seems so entrenched right now I don't really see the point in voting for other parties (at least, at the presidential level. I definitely try to pick the best candidate for the job regardless of party at lower gov't positions where it can make a difference.) I understand that I am part of the problem, but I don't see how people throwing away 1-2% of the vote (and no electoral college votes) will make any sort of impact, and in some cases it could actually have a serious impact on the election between the 2 major candidates, and not in a good way for those voting for the 3rd party, generally. (Not saying that would be the case this year, but it has happened in the past.)
Brady Marino
Footballguy
Why does this matter? The answer is no because so many think they're legally obligated to vote for Dems or Repubs.
Because you'll vote for what you believe in. Your vote won't matter for Obama or Romney. Really, it won't. One or two votes aren't going to matter. What will matter is if people like you vote for Johnson and start making the Libertarian Party viable (that and getting smarter planners). One election isn't going to shift public perception, but if there's steady growth over a few elections, it will.Seriously, vote for what you believe in, not who you're "supposed" to vote for.
No.
Your vote won't affect the election. Voting is a form of entertainment. You should vote for the best candidate, not the lesser of two evils, because you'll feel better about it afterwards.
Brady Marino
Footballguy
I think MT posted what I did in much fewer words. 
Sarnoff
Footballguy
Enough people Libertarian in 2012 will have two effects, even if Gary loses. In the short term, the eventual winner would recognize a need to break toward the libertarian platform because of the public demand that those stances be represented. In 2016, enough Libertarian votes in this election trigger all sorts of positive consequences--such as immediate ballot access for the next nominee, federal matching funds, presence in the debates, etc.Basically, if you think the Libertarian side should have a voice in the debate, you have to back them at the polls no matter how pointless it may seem in a single election.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
To be fair I do not think there were enough questions for this to be very definitive. But in the general sense that the questions covered I am:Gary Johnson 87%
Jill Stein 83%
Ron Paul 77%
Barack Obama 61%
Mitt Romney 34%
Then I found these interesting
Minnesota voters 90%
American voters 90%
Which leaves me wondering how they can determine that 100% of America agrees with Minnesota voters but I only do 90% and more importantly why do I agree with voters more than I do with any candidates position?
Before the poll I felt just as comfortable with supporting Jill Stein and the green party platform as I do Gary Johnson and the Libertarian platform. Environmental issues are very important to me. However at this time balancing the budget (which has always been important to me as well) is my top priority and I believe Gary Johnson is the best choice for those with this objective.
Last edited by a moderator:
No shock to me:
77% Ron Paul
on foreign policy, immigration, and environmental issues.
70% Gary Johnson
on foreign policy and environmental issues.
57% Barack Obama
on science, healthcare, and social issues.
53% Stewart Alexander
on healthcare and social issues.
52% Jill Stein
on healthcare and social issues.
51% Mitt Romney
on immigration issues.
46% Virgil Goode
on immigration issues.
43% Jimmy McMillan
on immigration and social issues.
77% Ron Paul
on foreign policy, immigration, and environmental issues.
70% Gary Johnson
on foreign policy and environmental issues.
57% Barack Obama
on science, healthcare, and social issues.
53% Stewart Alexander
on healthcare and social issues.
52% Jill Stein
on healthcare and social issues.
51% Mitt Romney
on immigration issues.
46% Virgil Goode
on immigration issues.
43% Jimmy McMillan
on immigration and social issues.
Wouldn't surprise me. I looked up Georgia and the top candidate was Johnson at 87%.
Similar threads
